Housing extension for autistic child’s bedroom should be refused planning permission, council says

The extension leaves ‘little garden area for future occupiers’
Watch more of our videos on Shots! 
and live on Freeview channel 276
Visit Shots! now

A housing extension built to give an autistic child their own space should be refused planning permission, council officers say.

Staff at Peterborough City Council’s (PCC) planning department say the extension added to 160 Northfield Road in Millfield leaves “little garden area for future occupiers”.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

It’s also “out of character” with surrounding buildings and represents “an overdevelopment of the application site”.

Read More
Plea to young people to take part in election of Youth MPs

But they add that the 4.4m rear extension, which has already been built, would not overshadow surrounding properties.

There’d also be no issues with it overlooking others as it’s single storey, they add in their report on the development.

PCC’s planning committee, made up of councillors, will consider an application to approve the extension on Tuesday, 20th February.

140 Northfield Road in Millfield140 Northfield Road in Millfield
140 Northfield Road in Millfield
Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Mr M Ali has applied to the council to apply retrospective planning permission to it, saying that it's used as a disabled bedroom and wet room.

Councillors will be told that the requirement for extra space for the autistic child is supported by a doctor’s letter.

Officers say that the extension goes against planning policy because it leaves less than four metres of space between the end of the extension and an existing outbuilding.

“Whilst officers are mindful of the need of the extension for the current occupants, this reduction would not leave adequate private amenity space for future occupiers of the house,” they say. “Therefore, this would adversely impact the amenity of future occupiers to a detrimental extent.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Officers also note that an application for an extension of the same size and scale was applied for last year but refused on design grounds.

They say they requested information as to why the bedroom and wetroom couldn’t be accommodated in the house – which already has two extensions – but “no further details or justification was provided”.

This application was also retrospective.